find_nodes

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries full burden. It discloses that it relays to server-side disc.find_nodes, but does not mention return format, pagination behavior, traversal depth, or whether it is read-only. The verb 'Find' implies reading, but no explicit safety or behavioral details are provided.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The first sentence is concise and informative. The second sentence 'PR 6: relays to server-side disc.find_nodes.' is an implementation note that does not help an agent select or invoke the tool and could be omitted. The description is somewhat padded with non-actionable info.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

No output schema exists, and the description does not state what the tool returns (e.g., node paths, types, counts) or how pagination works via limit/cursor. For a 5-param tool with no output schema, more context is needed to invoke it correctly and interpret results.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, but the description explains pattern and node_type matching, and root_path as the search root. However, limit and cursor are not explained, leaving pagination semantics unclear. The description partially compensates for the schema gap but not fully.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the verb 'Find' and the resource 'nodes under root_path' with specific matching criteria (glob/substring pattern or node_type). It also distinguishes from siblings like list_children by emphasizing recursive search under a path, and the default root_path adds clarity.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as list_children or find_error_nodes. The description only mentions the default root_path, which is more parameter information than usage context. No exclusions or alternative scenarios are given.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.